Since when is "quality game" considered a "masterpiece"?
Everyone knows the Xbox One does not have masterpiece games.
And why would anyone invest in a PS4 Pro? You really need someone to explain that to you?
1. Better PS VR support
2. Better textures and resolution over the PS4
3. More powerful overall over the PS4
That is like saying why would anyone invest in an Xbox One X
Like I said before. Microsoft needs the Xbox 360 to keep the Xbox One in the race. The PS4 does not need the PS3. This is why MS keeps putting out last gen support on their console. More 360 titles are played on the Xbox One than actual XB1 games..
a. Who defines what a masterpiece is? Is it the industry or is it me as a gamer? Everyone has his way of looking at things e.g. Forza Horizon 3 was better reviewed than Forza Motorsport 6 or 7. I prefer the simulation game to the arcade, and by some distance too.
The industry keeps telling me that Tekken 7 is the best Tekken game in the series, and I have played every Tekken game since Tekken 2. I still believe that the best Tekken game is Tekken 5, back in the Playstation 2, and that the best fighting game I have played to date in Dead or Alive 4.
I have a friend who is happy just getting a FIFA game each year, and another who only plays FIFA, Pro Evo and NBA 2k. you could never convince them to get into anything else because they see no value in it. Each one of the games I mentioned got a high review from IGN, they were all top quality, and some are the best titles in their genre. So what are we arguing about? That they did not get a 10/10? Those games are few and far between in any generation, and you can count them even in this generation.
b. It was a rhetorical question on the PS4 pro, and one that I answered with a question.
If PS4 games are playable on PS5, how are all the Sony exclusives wiped clear next gen?
You are right. With the release of Xbox One X, Xbox has PS4 beat in every way......except games. That power boost hasn't pushed Xbox ahead of PS4 though. Heck, Xbox One X doesn't outsell base Xbox One just like Pro doesn't outsell base PS4. So when are all these advantages supposed to kick in? Next gen? And is it really becoming more and more apparent where PS4 lacks or is it becoming more and more important where PS4 is superior (games).? I really don't know. Xbox One should be wiping the floor with PS4. And yet, latest NPD was just released and yep, PS4 won again. Xbox One is in third place. Despite BC, crossplay, etc.
As far as narratives, I seem to remember a heavy defense of the base Xbox One mounted by a number of Xbox fans as well as lot of criticism aimed at Sony first party earlier this gen. Xbox fans are just as guilty of changing their story it seems.
There was no narrative being put out. Sony did not have games early on when MS did. The moment Uncharted 4 came out followed by Horizon Zero Dawn the next year and then God of War this year is when a narrative started cropping up that it was now about games and not the power difference. We have always stated that Microsoft has always had games, but lacked diversity. There are some that would love to see Fable, some like me would simply love a Rallisport Challenge and a new Perfect Dark along with any new IP's that are quality.
All through, people who primarily game on this console have said that there was a need to diversify that lineup, possibly get some more development teams in or go the publishing route. When Phil Spencer said that they were working on it and that it would take time, some of us simply said let us wait and see. There were those who jumped the gun seeing that power was no longer in the game, so we really have not changed.
On the former points, Microsoft has not lacked games. I honestly do not know why this is still spun as if it is true. Pick any year and they put out some really good games. Where they messed was the launch, and the power difference.......that bad press is not something that they have been able to get rid off, and it has been shown by their market performance. They have admitted this to some degree in the past month or so, something you rarely see from most companies.
What I think was being stated is what the future holds. I do not think that Microsoft will outperform Sony when it comes to console sales next gen. While that is something they may be planning to achieve, the real money that they are betting on along with game sales is game pass subscriptions and having a superior service. If they are to migrate current gen games into the next generation, and have that on their game pass catalogue as they continue to grow their next gen library then that might be a selling point to some gamers. If game pass is also to succeed, then they have to have a good number of developers putting out content that is diverse.
The significance of the studio's seems to be vastly overstated as if MS just purchased Guerrilla Games or even CD prjeckt.
Two of the studio's they've picked up are indie devs, with small teams. Both of those studio's have only put out 2 games. Neither were technical strokes of brilliance at that, and one of them has yet to actually put out something that is technically solid.
One of the other teams is tiny... like 50 guys? They have the technical competence (designing your own in-house engine ain't easy - even if they ultimately made the switch to UE) but there is no manpower here.
Another one has no staff...
And the last is the only one comprised of a full house of competent Devs, but who've only ever been allowed to make titles in a single genre.
I don't see how this somehow negates the likes of Naughty Dog, Guerrilla Games, Santa Monica etc. etc. to make this a valid point...
What is the significance of these studio's in relation to what Sony, or even Ninetendo have?... this really should have been done about 5 years ago. If anything, this is catching up to the momentum Sony has, not the other way around.
This is probably ill-informed, but definetly highly subjective.
I don't see any additional value in some of what XB offer - namely the EA stuff. You stop paying EA, those free goodies go away. Personally, there is no value in EA access for me. I play far too infrequently for the subscription cost... which is in addition to paying to play on the xbox itself (not that Sony do any better, but at least EA aren't there to rub salt in).
PS4 also offers Cross-play as well, not that any xbox diehards care to notice. I believe Sony have been doing so since last-gen and were probably the only ones doing it last-gen. Sony even entertained cross-platform-cross-title play with EVE and Dust.
MS did not entertain the idea of cross-platform then... why is this such a big deal with Sony now?
There is nothing wrong with getting a talented developer, and there is nothing wrong with the numbers either. Ninja Theory put out a AAA title with a $10M budget that included advertising with a cast of 20 people working on the project.
When Sony bought out Guerrilla games, all they had put out was Killzone on the playstation 2, and it was not a great game. What was Bungie before Microsoft bought them?
What was Playground games before they started partnering with Turn 10 to do an open world arcade version of the sim?
It is almost lost as to who some of these people who work for these studios are and their imprint on the gaming scene. Rod Fergurson took over the Coalition with only three developers that had worked on Gears, Compulsion is headed by someone who worked on Bioshock, The Initiative by a gaming guru, Undead Labs by someone who used to work for Blizzard and ArenaNet.
Some would have us believe that they have bought scrubs. No, they have bought development teams that they believe have promise. Whether that promise is delivered upon we have to wait and see.
I also do not see the problem with a studio hiring. MS started Turn 10, they built the Coalition from the ground up, and Playground was doing the same for a new game that they are working on. Why are people so interested in writing off some of these developers before they have had a chance to put out a game for MS under MS ownership?